In order to see how much of a performance boost the new models bring, I've collected 32-bit Geekbench 2 results for all of the models available on the Geekbench Browser. I've then compared these scores against the scores for their 2011 and 2010 counterparts.

If you're not familiar with Geekbench 2, higher Geekbench 2 scores are better. Also, keep in mind that Geekbench 2 only measures processor and memory performance; it won't measure the benefits of new video cards or storage devices.

Oh, if you're curious how your computer stacks up against the new MacBook Airs or the new MacBook Pros you can download Geekbench and find out (it's a free download).

MacBook Air Benchmarks, 2010 to 2012

13-inch Mid 2012Intel Core i7-3667U 2.0 GHz (2 cores)

7,007

11-inch Mid 2012Intel Core i7-3667U 2.0 GHz (2 cores)

7,004

13-inch Mid 2012Intel Core i5-3427U 1.8 GHz (2 cores)

6,197

11-inch Mid 2012Intel Core i5-3317U 1.7 GHz (2 cores)

5,770

11-inch Mid 2011Intel Core i7-2677M 1.8 GHz (2 cores)

5,710

13-inch Mid 2011Intel Core i5-2557M 1.7 GHz (2 cores)

5,268

11-inch Mid 2011Intel Core i5-2467M 1.6 GHz (2 cores)

4,587

13-inch Late 2010Intel Core 2 Duo L9600 2.13 GHz (2 cores)

3,011

13-inch Late 2010Intel Core 2 Duo L9400 1.86 GHz (2 cores)

2,689

11-inch Late 2010Intel Core 2 Duo U9600 1.6 GHz (2 cores)

2,271

11-inch Late 2010Intel Core 2 Duo U9400 1.4 GHz (2 cores)

2,025

Intel's new Ivy Bridge processor, with its faster processors and more efficient architecture, means that last year's fastest MacBook Air is slightly slower than this year's slowest MacBook Air.

MacBook Pro Benchmarks, 2010 to 2012

15-inch Mid 2012Intel Core i7-3820QM 2.7 GHz (4 cores)

12,303

15-inch Retina DisplayIntel Core i7-3720QM 2.6 GHz (4 cores)

11,844

15-inch Mid 2012Intel Core i7-3720QM 2.6 GHz (4 cores)

11,800

15-inch Retina DisplayIntel Core i7-3615QM 2.3 GHz (4 cores)

10,810

17-inch Late 2011Intel Core i7-2860QM 2.5 GHz (4 cores)

10,760

15-inch Late 2011Intel Core i7-2860QM 2.5 GHz (4 cores)

10,642

17-inch Late 2011Intel Core i7-2760QM 2.4 GHz (4 cores)

10,420

15-inch Late 2011Intel Core i7-2760QM 2.4 GHz (4 cores)

10,360

15-inch Early 2011Intel Core i7-2820QM 2.3 GHz (4 cores)

10,191

17-inch Early 2011Intel Core i7-2820QM 2.3 GHz (4 cores)

10,124

17-inch Early 2011Intel Core i7-2720QM 2.2 GHz (4 cores)

9,868

15-inch Early 2011Intel Core i7-2720QM 2.2 GHz (4 cores)

9,834

15-inch Late 2011Intel Core i7-2675QM 2.2 GHz (4 cores)

9,315

15-inch Early 2011Intel Core i7-2635QM 2.0 GHz (4 cores)

8,712

13-inch Late 2011Intel Core i7-2640M 2.8 GHz (2 cores)

6,964

13-inch Early 2011Intel Core i7-2620M 2.7 GHz (2 cores)

6,782

13-inch Late 2011Intel Core i5-2435M 2.4 GHz (2 cores)

6,047

13-inch Early 2011Intel Core i5-2415M 2.3 GHz (2 cores)

5,881

15-inch Early 2010Intel Core i7-640M 2.8 GHz (2 cores)

5,852

17-inch Early 2010Intel Core i7-640M 2.8 GHz (2 cores)

5,785

17-inch Early 2010Intel Core i7-620M 2.6 GHz (2 cores)

5,543

15-inch Early 2010Intel Core i7-620M 2.6 GHz (2 cores)

5,540

15-inch Early 2010Intel Core i5-540M 2.5 GHz (2 cores)

4,973

17-inch Early 2010Intel Core i5-540M 2.5 GHz (2 cores)

4,955

15-inch Early 2010Intel Core i5-520M 2.4 GHz (2 cores)

4,860

13-inch Early 2010Intel Core 2 Duo P8800 2.66 GHz (2 cores)

3,652

13-inch Early 2010Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 2.4 GHz (2 cores)

3,328

As with the new MacBook Airs, Intel's new Ivy Bridge processors bring noticeable performance improvements to the new MacBook Pros.

Currently there are no 32-bit results for any of the new 13-inch MacBook Pros; is this an indication that most people prefer the lighter 13-inch MacBook Air or the more powerful 15-inch MacBook Pro over the 13-inch MacBook Pro?

Also worth noting is that both the regular MacBook Pro and the Retina MacBook Pro use the same processors. Users trying to decide whether to get the thinner Retina MacBook Pro won't have to worry that it will be slower than the regular MacBook Pro.

John Poole is the founder of Primate Labs and lives in Toronto, Ontario with his wife Deborah. You can find John on Twitter or Google+.